Bohs exceeding 65%? [Archive] - Page 2

ashbournebohs

15/05/2009, 9:33 PM

So its ok to be above 65% all season as long as the books look 65% at the end of the season, buisness as usual at Bohs so.By the way your magic pencil accounting which got you the licence never mind your title and champions league entry shoulda had you relegated already and may still do.you are cheats and yis know yis are just ask Mr Trench.

RoversHead .Did you lot ever get around to paying that launderette bill for cleaning your gear.Whats that saying eaten bread is quickly forgotten.
It is a well known fact that your club is only alive because of the co operation of other league clubs..When the time comes for us to wind Bohs up and form another club sorry company we will give you a ring for advice..

Ezeikial

15/05/2009, 9:42 PM

RoversHead .Did you lot ever get around to paying that launderette bill for cleaning your gear.Whats that saying eaten bread is quickly forgotten.
It is a well known fact that your club is only alive because of the co operation of other league clubs..When the time comes for us to wind Bohs up and form another club sorry company we will give you a ring for advice..

Perhaps you should have asked for his phone number....

niallsparky

15/05/2009, 9:51 PM

So its ok to be above 65% all season as long as the books look 65% at the end of the season

Eh yes. I don't see why not? Are you implying that Bohs accounts have been doctored in the past and been qualified wrongly as true by impartial arbitrators? You have a copy of the accounts yourself, what discrepancies have you managed to unearth that these trained auditors couldn't may I ask?

Ezeikial

15/05/2009, 9:56 PM

Eh yes. I don't see why not? Are you implying that Bohs accounts have been doctored in the past and been qualified wrongly as true by impartial arbitrators? You have a copy of the accounts yourself, what discrepancies have you managed to unearth that these trained auditors couldn't may I ask?

Ahem - the small issue of spending far more then you could afford!

L.T.F.C.

15/05/2009, 10:11 PM

Eh yes. I don't see why not? Are you implying that Bohs accounts have been doctored in the past and been qualified wrongly as true by impartial arbitrators? You have a copy of the accounts yourself, what discrepancies have you managed to unearth that these trained auditors couldn't may I ask?
there is such an air of ah-ha-I'm-so-much-smarter-than-you smarmriness from this post.

Sidefx

15/05/2009, 10:32 PM

Ahem - the small issue of spending far more then you could afford!

Eh... people and glasshouses... ;)

Ezeikial

15/05/2009, 10:52 PM

Eh... people and glasshouses... ;)

If by that pithy comment you mean that supporters of any club that is not running a surplus should not post here, then foot.ie is going to be a very lonely place.

There is an enormous difference between Ollie-esque overspending (and refusing to learn from mistakes) and a club that, recognising the possibility of a modest deficit arising in the future, calls on supporters for proactive assistance in fund raising.

pete

15/05/2009, 11:00 PM

The problem is budgets were excepted that were based on exagerated gate revenue in Corks case....

4000 at the cross tonight & should at least get that for Bohs in 2 weeks so its all good again.

niallsparky

15/05/2009, 11:03 PM

there is such an air of ah-ha-I'm-so-much-smarter-than-you smarmriness from this post.

Pedantry.

niallsparky

15/05/2009, 11:11 PM

Ahem - the small issue of spending far more then you could afford!

Nobody is denying that. RoversHead seemed to be claiming that we presented our accounts in an untrue way to pass the 65% threshold deduced that we're cheats as a result of this.

This doesn't matter though, the fact is that we are in a bad financial position and we are breaking the 65% cap at this moment in time. The hands of the new board are tied though, as the players have already taken wage cuts and some players are on fairly long contracts. That leaves increasing revenue as the only option, unfortunately that's rather difficult also. Therefore, we must hope for a decent European run/League win or player transfer fees. This breach of the wage cap really doesn't matter if we're withing the regulations at season's end.

brianw82

15/05/2009, 11:46 PM

If things stay as they are, I'd imagine Carey will be going back to Celtic when his loan is up in July? Don't know if he'd be on a big wage or not, but it would make sense to let him go as they wouldn't be breaking any contracts.

Ezeikial

16/05/2009, 12:10 AM

Nobody is denying that. RoversHead seemed to be claiming that we presented our accounts in an untrue way to pass the 65% threshold deduced that we're cheats as a result of this.

This doesn't matter though, the fact is that we are in a bad financial position and we are breaking the 65% cap at this moment in time. The hands of the new board are tied though, as the players have already taken wage cuts and some players are on fairly long contracts. That leaves increasing revenue as the only option, unfortunately that's rather difficult also. Therefore, we must hope for a decent European run/League win or player transfer fees. This breach of the wage cap really doesn't matter if we're withing the regulations at season's end.

Thats a fairly depressing (if pragmatic) view of the current plight at Bohs. Hanging your hat "on a decent European run/League win or player transfer fees" as being the panacea for the short term, is perhaps a tad unrealistic.

While there have been loads of inferences of creative accounting by Bohs, what I can't get by head around is how the club permitted/endorsed the signings of Keegan, Shelley and Ndo at a time when it surely was totally tranparent that the numbers did not add up?

What changed since then to now?

L.T.F.C.

16/05/2009, 12:35 AM

Pedantry.
more fun saying it like i did.

niallsparky

16/05/2009, 10:34 AM

what I can't get by head around is how the club permitted/endorsed the signings of Keegan, Shelley and Ndo at a time when it surely was totally tranparent that the numbers did not add up?

What changed since then to now?

We had a squad of 12 before they came in. They're all on �1k per week or less and a contract of less than 1 year. Effectively it could be put, bring in these players and we'll likely win the league, covering their wages for the year or don't sign them and we probably won't win the league thus getting no prize money.

Ezeikial

16/05/2009, 11:31 AM

We had a squad of 12 before they came in. They're all on €1k per week or less and a contract of less than 1 year. Effectively it could be put, bring in these players and we'll likely win the league, covering their wages for the year or don't sign them and we probably won't win the league thus getting no prize money.

Now, I'm even more bewildered!

Are you justifying this strategy or simply suggesting that this was the warped thinking of the board?

Even to a reckless gambler outlaying circa €130,000 (say €1k x 44 weeks x 3 players) to increase the chances of winning the top prize of €280,000, seems like a bizarre punt. But when the gambler is already massively in debt, and is likely to breach the rules as a consequence (risking resultant relegation, european ban, and possible total financial meltdown), frankly it seems like the actions of the deranged and deluded.

It's a slightly moot issue, but your suggestion of only 12 players simply does not add up to me. The current first team squad numbers 18 and potentially up to 21 (if you including Sean Byrne, Paddy Madden and Brian McCarthy).

Help me here, I really trying to understand how Bohs have placed themselves in this situation

niallsparky

16/05/2009, 12:38 PM

Are you justifying this strategy or simply suggesting that this was the warped thinking of the board?

Even to a reckless gambler outlaying circa €130,000 (say €1k x 44 weeks x 3 players) to increase the chances of winning the top prize of €280,000, seems like a bizarre punt. But when the gambler is already massively in debt, and is likely to breach the rules as a consequence (risking resultant relegation, european ban, and possible total financial meltdown), frankly it seems like the actions of the deranged and deluded.

I can only presume that this was the boards thinking and despite it being a reasonably calculated gamble it's not really fair on the other clubs by putting the league's integrity at risk. Personally, I'd like to see us giving more younger players a chance. At present we have Ken Oman, Neale Fenn and Glenn Cronin as bench regulars when it should be the likes of Ryan McEvoy, Paddy Madden, Sean Byrne and Dean Marshall competing for these places.

I'm not sure of the exact terms of the wage cuts (whether they were in return for contract extensions) but by my calculations the contracts of Glen Crowe, Neale Fenn and Owen Heary are due to expire. These are 3 of the highest earners at the club and we should have some scope to further reduce the wage bill at the end of the year.

By the way, we brought in Gregg, Keegan, Ndo, Shelley and Carey so our sqaud size was 13 before that I think.

Ezeikial

17/05/2009, 12:42 PM

I can only presume that this was the boards thinking and despite it being a reasonably calculated gamble it's not really fair on the other clubs by putting the league's integrity at risk.

1) Resonable? Calculated? - you can't be serious

2) Not fair to intentional break the 65% rule? Is this not what people have referred to as cheating?
What about putting Bohemians integrity at risk?

I'm not sure of the exact terms of the wage cuts (whether they were in return for contract extensions) but by my calculations the contracts of Glen Crowe, Neale Fenn and Owen Heary are due to expire. These are 3 of the highest earners at the club and we should have some scope to further reduce the wage bill at the end of the year.

How will this have any impact on this seasons spending if their contracts expire in November?

bohs til i die

18/05/2009, 11:18 AM

The players contracts run until November, which is also the end of our financial year. If we are breaking the 65% wage cap by much then we will have to offload at least 2, possibly 4 players in July to get back in line because we simply wont increase revenue by enough to cover the difference. I dont think the embargo was imposed because we are operating at 70%. I would imagine the situation is far more serious then that.

The wage cuts at the start of the year were requested so we could sign 4-5 players and remain competitive. At the same time presumably, the board would have known the budgets were flawed, or else they were expecting our home crowds to be in the region of 3000 every time.

I dont envy the current board the choices they have to make.

marinobohs

18/05/2009, 1:02 PM

Ah balls I'm mixing up my Cork and Bohs doom stories again....

suppose its better than concentrating on pats doom story:)

marinobohs

18/05/2009, 1:07 PM

So its ok to be above 65% all season as long as the books look 65% at the end of the season, buisness as usual at Bohs so.By the way your magic pencil accounting which got you the licence never mind your title and champions league entry shoulda had you relegated already and may still do.you are cheats and yis know yis are just ask Mr Trench.

Holy god ! and all that from a rovers fan. Really stupid preaching about magic pencil accounts when your club was found guilty of presenting fraudulant accounts to the Licencing committee (as you say CHEATS).

selective memory is a wonderful thing but it will not change the facts.

pineapple stu

18/05/2009, 1:27 PM

FFS, the fans reported the cheats, ousted them and took over.

When you lot do that, then you can talk.

marinobohs

18/05/2009, 1:44 PM

FFS, the fans reported the cheats, ousted them and took over.

When you lot do that, then you can talk.

I presume this was directed at me ( I thought you would know how to use the "quote" function by now). The fact is Bohs have NOT cheated and Rovers DID cheat. Let me know the part you are having difficulty understanding.

pineapple stu

18/05/2009, 1:50 PM

OneRedArmy

18/05/2009, 2:12 PM

I presume this was directed at me ( I thought you would know how to use the "quote" function by now). The fact is Bohs have NOT cheated and Rovers DID cheat. Let me know the part you are having difficulty understanding.

Cheating is entirely subjective.

What we can say is that Bohs are in breach of a compliance requirement. As were Rovers.

marinobohs

18/05/2009, 2:53 PM

You don't need to quote every post you reply to; the fact that I posted straight after you should have been enough.

And congratulations on ignoring the entire point of my post. Feel free to address it at any stage.

Bohs are not cheats and have never been found to cheat. Rovers were found to submit false accounts. These are facts, if you can prove Bohemian FC has cheated then do so otherwise it is pointless speculation. accounts are done on an annualised basis (Bi annual if hoops) and as such one off payments (as at Pats and many other clubs) can make a big difference. Accordingly please wait until the end of the season before making allegations.

El-Pietro

18/05/2009, 2:57 PM

So its ok to be above 65% all season as long as the books look 65% at the end of the season, buisness as usual at Bohs so.By the way your magic pencil accounting which got you the licence never mind your title and champions league entry shoulda had you relegated already and may still do.you are cheats and yis know yis are just ask Mr Trench.
actually yes - you could be at 150% for every day of the season

but when the final numbers are in - if your wages are at 65% or less of your total income the rest of the season wont have mattered

its the same as being second all season, if you are top on the last day, thats all that mattered - ive a feeling though you wont grasp this, where are the ucd and shelbourne fans when you need them

Mr A

18/05/2009, 2:57 PM

OneRedArmy

18/05/2009, 3:00 PM

marinobohs

18/05/2009, 3:04 PM

Bohs in the past few years have been funded by the Danninger Deal, which according to the High Court was entered into by Bohs under false pretences.

I know there's an appeal ongoing, but that sounds like some form of cheating to me.

I really doubt that the LOI rule book mentions Danninger or any other deal.The High court found in connection with a small piece of Dalymount not the whole ground, but hey dont let the facts get in the way...

If at the end of the season Bohs are in breach of the rules then the penalties will apply.Thank you for your concern and congrats that your club has nothing to worry about on the finance front.

marinobohs

18/05/2009, 3:05 PM

Define "cheating"?

Definition probobly best left to those throwing around the accusation.

p�l-dcfc

18/05/2009, 3:09 PM

Definition probobly best left to those throwing around the accusation.

You do talk some rubbish.

John83

18/05/2009, 3:09 PM

Define "cheating"?
A quick check turned up, "A deception for profit to yourself," but no one's accusing Bohs of making a profit, so perhaps they aren't cheating after all.

redobit

18/05/2009, 3:25 PM

Ian Rossiter is the best paid kitman in the world.

pete

18/05/2009, 3:30 PM

I remember recently when the Bohs accounts were revealed online that someone worked out that they had very well paid bar staff. The fact they these would seem to be actually players makes a lot of sense now...

LukeO

18/05/2009, 4:31 PM

Ian Rossiter is the best paid kitman in the world.

....Mark

Candystripe

18/05/2009, 4:32 PM

So are people here saying that Derry and Rovers only beat a crowd of groundsmen,barmen and coaches in the past two weeks?

Ezeikial

18/05/2009, 5:03 PM

Bohs are not cheats and have never been found to cheat. Rovers were found to submit false accounts. These are facts, if you can prove Bohemian FC has cheated then do so otherwise it is pointless speculation. accounts are done on an annualised basis (Bi annual if hoops) and as such one off payments (as at Pats and many other clubs) can make a big difference. Accordingly please wait until the end of the season before making allegations.

Attempts to stifle this debate by way of " wait and see" comments or mud-slinging at other clubs wont wash.

The simple reality is that the management of Bohemian FC have taken the club to the brink of disaster through incredible ineptitude, as the multitudes cheered them on further.

While the creative accounting allegations are simply allegations (and very plausible based on the track record), no one has suggested any resonable explanation as to why Bohs splashed out on significantly on Keegan, Shelley, Ndo, Gregg and Carey at a time when it must have been blatantly obvious that it would almost certainly take them well past the 65% mark.

Cheating or just irresponsible? i

passerrby

18/05/2009, 5:54 PM

this great country of ours has been founded on creative accounting and is a national pastime but when the wife finds you in a compromising position with the maid now thats cheating
but back to the topic whos maid was bohs shagging

OneRedArmy

18/05/2009, 5:56 PM

but back to the topic whos maid was bohs shaggingSean Connor.

Wait a minute, that one was a misunderstanding, it was only dinner...

bohs til i die

18/05/2009, 7:54 PM

I really doubt that the LOI rule book mentions Danninger or any other deal.The High court found in connection with a small piece of Dalymount not the whole ground, but hey dont let the facts get in the way...

Eh the land deal with albion involved a substantial piece of land, not the whole ground but the deal was/is worth �1,300,000 to the club, with the majority of that money already received (and spent).

By spending over 65% of the income on wages we are breaking the rules (which is cheating). If we improve our income and reduce expenditure (and not just massage the figures in the accounts) so that our 12 month accounts show us under 65% then we are not breaking the rules.

We will know in July what the situation is if/when players are let leave and not replaced.

peadar1987

18/05/2009, 9:03 PM

Lads, I don't see what the big deal is, if Bohs haven't been cheating, then there's no problem. If Bohs have been cheating and paying �5000 a week for Jason Byrne to pull pints, they'll be over the salary cap and will go into administration soon enough, they'll get their 10 point deduction, plus the extra penalties depending on how much of their debt they pay off, and probably end up in the same situation Drogheda are in this season.

If anyone should be angry with the situation, it's the Bohs supporters, not us.

peadar1987

18/05/2009, 9:23 PM

I'll be angry if they're allowed to go into administration without penalty, but my point is, there's no benefit to the club if they are fobbing off the FAI, because they will go bust.

brianw82

19/05/2009, 7:51 AM

So are people here saying that Derry and Rovers only beat a crowd of groundsmen,barmen and coaches in the past two weeks?

http://www.geocities.com/TelevisionCity/7333/pictures02/baseball.jpg

Bohs' team, yesterday. Including new janitor, Paul Keegan.

redobit

19/05/2009, 8:28 AM

....Mark

Meant to say Mark, Ian is his brother.

pineapple stu

19/05/2009, 8:33 AM

I'll be angry if they're allowed to go into administration without penalty
Bohs won't go into administration.

I take your point on the fact that Bohs will get what's coming to them, but the thing is that another club will come along and spend silly money (it was Shels first, then Cork, then Drogheda, now Bohs...). Shels getting what was coming to them didn't mean that Bray suddenly reached a position they deserve. Granted, the recession may sort that to an extent, but overspending isn't a problem you can cure by having one team go belly up.

d13bohs

19/05/2009, 12:52 PM

Bohs won't go into administration.

I take your point on the fact that Bohs will get what's coming to them, but the thing is that another club will come along and spend silly money (it was Shels first, then Cork, then Drogheda, now Bohs...). Shels getting what was coming to them didn't mean that Bray suddenly reached a position they deserve. Granted, the recession may sort that to an extent, but overspending isn't a problem you can cure by having one team go belly up.

This is true, there will always be someone who thinks if they throw enough money at a team, they will make it to the big time. It was rovers in the 80's and its been all the clubs listed above since then (currently us unfortunately). When we fail, someone else will decide that if they spend a few quid more on better players, they will get more fans in, generate more money, make it through to the champions league group stages and this time next year we'll be millionaires (Rodney)

pineapple stu

19/05/2009, 12:57 PM

And you've also clubs like Galway, Harps and Sligo who are spending silly money trying just to reach mid-table for some bizarre reason, which pushes the sensible clubs down even further.

blackholesun

19/05/2009, 3:58 PM

If these rumours are true, then I say well done Bohs for having the foresight to help their players developer alternative careers outside football. A footballer's career is short and it wont be long before some of these players are on the football scrapheap. It is great to see a club who have such genuine long term concern for their current players welfare.

I wonder is there a FAS grant or something the club could apply for to help fund this type of career cross-training activities. The government and FAI and PFAI should really be doing more to support this kind of outside the box thinking, especially in these perilious economic times.

;)

bhs

El-Pietro

19/05/2009, 7:00 PM